Soviet SAM's effectiveness against US Fighter Aircrafts

Around one year ago the stat of the art's nato airforce undetook exercises in order to evaluate Sam 10.Sam 10 belonged to Slovakia against other nato's airfleets. In order I think to prepare a syria -and next Iran-'s attack -but canceled now-. Sam 10 underwent several nato jammers, aerial attacksThe result of this exercise, demonstrated how hard it is Sa-10. Without huge losses -as there was during Vietnam's war, and Korea's war- it is nearly impossible to bypass the radar's Sa-10. With personnal highly trained, and very comptetent Sa-10 has great chances to inflict sever blows to nato's airforces.

This was a blow to the israelis's propaganda that claimed they -supposed- bypassed the Sa-10 complex in a so-called exercises where they would successufly jammed S-300.

Wait, Slovaks inherited S-300s? I though that the most WP nations got was a Kub or S-125.

Yaah I also want to know how Slovakia got S-300. I dont think they have s-300PMU. I dont know how they managed to buy it or Russia gave it to them?

Russia owed Slovakia $1.6 billion after the Cold War. They repaid part of it with MiG-29s and S-300PMU. They signed the deal in 1999 and received delivery a year or two later. It was an attempt by the Yeltsin government to keep Slovaks out of NATO, but it was a failure.

_________________The true value of life knows only the paratrooper. For he is more likely to look death in the eye. -- Vasily Margelov

nemrod wrote:Around one year ago the stat of the art's nato airforce undetook exercises in order to evaluate Sam 10.Sam 10 belonged to Slovakia against other nato's airfleets. In order I think to prepare a syria -and next Iran-'s attack -but canceled now-. Sam 10 underwent several nato jammers, aerial attacksThe result of this exercise, demonstrated how hard it is Sa-10. Without huge losses -as there was during Vietnam's war, and Korea's war- it is nearly impossible to bypass the radar's Sa-10. With personnal highly trained, and very comptetent Sa-10 has great chances to inflict sever blows to nato's airforces.

This was a blow to the israelis's propaganda that claimed they -supposed- bypassed the Sa-10 complex in a so-called exercises where they would successufly jammed S-300.

OK, now the only question is which version of the SA-10 (S-300) did the Slovaks have??

I think that version did not have electronic counter or electronic counter-counter measures.

We do know that Almaz would not have given any top of the line product for export that too in close vicinity of so many rich countries "at that time" UK, France , Germany Swiss etc.(All part of NATO) .

What kind of EW measures S-300 had at that time remains a question?

There was a recent BLEEDING-EDGE air defense exercise in Kalingrad .The expanse of Exercise was from Kaliningrad to Murmansk..!

The latest MIG-31BM(I mean 5-6 MIG 31 BM fighters) fresh (out of completing their trials) were pitted against jamming resistant S-300.(There was no S-400 ) taking part. I guess SU27 were also in "SEAD" support of MIG 31.Really complex scenario here

These exercises were so classified that no results , scenarios are given in Media.Some link is here .. but not in -depth details

S-300 exercise in 2013

February 18 (RIA Novosti) - Modernized S-300 surface-to-air missiles will shoot down “enemy” fighters in an exercise in Russia’s Western Military District, the district's press service said on Monday.The joint tactical exercise involving aviation, antiaircraft and radiotechnical forces, encompasses an area from Russia’s westernmost exclave of Kaliningrad to central Russia’s Nizhny Novgorod and from Murmansk in the north to Belgorod in the south, the Western Military District said.

Well I think(not sure though) that all the HELL-HEAVEN combined Electronic counter measures of MIG-31 would not stand a chance against the "DRUG RESISTANT" S-300's.

I would like to conclude(although not for sure) the Slovakian S-300 were several generations behind the present day S-300.

I think that version did not have electronic counter or electronic counter-counter measures.....I would like to conclude(although not for sure) the Slovakian S-300 were several generations behind the present day S-300.

Turkish F-4E, French Mirage, Rafale, Germany's Learjet Dannemark' F-16' , DA-20 from Norway, E-3 sentry AWACS, were engaged in Mace.Whatever the version SA-10, I think Nato did this exercise enough realistic to fight the Syria's air defense SA-10/12.

This exercise was done in order to check the Israelis claims. SA-10/12 could be neutralize, yes or no ?The Israel's purpose is to push USA and Nato in a war against Syria, and Iran. However US and european military staff were reluctants, if not skeptical about the israeli claims, if not blusters

The conclusion was clear, SA-10/12 with a very well trained staff could easily inflict a sever blow to any agressor.By the statement Nato demonstrated that presently it would be a suicide if Nato undertake an attack against Syria.

As I said since the beginning, if Russia gives the green light, Nato could easily overthrow Assad's regime. But Russia this time has changed, Mr Putin, is not Yestlsin neither Gorbi, furthermore there is another actor that enter in the global chessboard China.Indeed, 15 years ago Beijin was insignificant, this time Russia+China can easily stop US agression, either in Korea, in Iran, and obviously in Syria.

indochina wrote:There really Volhov S-75M3 (SA-2E Guideline) has shot down the F-15E in the Gulf War in 1991?

I don't know. When US losses aircrafts, either figther-bombers, or bombers in order to justify the losses, uses the magic words "Mechanical faillures", or less often "Anti Aircrafts Guns". Avoiding as much as possible SAM causes, and chieftly forbidden the uses of Mig's causes -Mig 25 downed an 2 F15A in Lebanon in 80's, downed at least F-18, and B-52 during Desert Storm-. The propaganda is a weapon as another weapon, you realize very well where are interrests. For example during "Desert Storm" sources said that US lost around 30 F-16, obviously du to....accidents, hence "mecanical faillures". The scale of US coalition losses during Desert Storm is still unknown, but far more important than we believe.

You notice that several years after conflicts, US withdrew from Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, because of "Mechanical faillures". Not because of General Dynamics, Mc Donnell Douglass, or Boeing, but ...."Mechanical faillures".

The worst shit of propaganda is provided by israelis, as they use US hardwares, you will have to know their magic aces as Giora Epstein, Abraham Shalmon, Asher Snir, against the genetic so-stupid arab pilots. However, when you search you discover many surprises, that propaganda tried to hide. Finally, US, Israelis hardwares, or pilots are not upper the others, but simply as the others. And soviet hardwares performances were excellent seeing the conditions of use. Surely, if there were a conventionnal conclict between US and USSR, US could not win.We will discuss next about israelo-arabs conclicts.

I think all ex soviet SAM are still effectives, and still very threatening all US hardwares nowadays. However the main drawbacks of Sam-2,3, 5, are not mobiles, and hence highly vulnerable to US cruise missiles, and their anti-radiation missiles, if and only if they can launch hundreds, in order to disable one battery in the better case.No use to tell more about the SA-6, 8, 9, 10, 11, etc...effectiveness, as the oldest fixe batteries are still danger for US aircrafts.Back to your question, SA-2 could obviously downed every US aircraft, as during the Libya's war an old SA-5 supposed to be downed a F-15C. Information provided by US officials, true ? False ?...

However, It is usefull to mention that many specialists are not agree with this opinion, as during Vietnam war,US lost between 2.500 to 3.500 aircrafts and SA-2 downed about 1.500 US aircrafts. It is obvious that, never US will admit this. About Israel, they never said the truth, and part of israelis losses in october 1973, are far higher than Israel claimed, and most of them were du to the migs. It is noteworthy too, that during operation Mole Cricket operation in 1982, if Israel indeed successfully destroyed, or disabled many SAM radars, the reason -is evidently written off- is Syria had no intentions to engage its SAM against Israel, all the radars were built up all its radars in no-offensive posture -maybe du to soviet pressures-, then, only at this moment, Israel triggered SEAD in violation of all agreements. Pretending there was a success, it is a lie.

In 1991, we will never know the range of US losses, as Iraq lied, and of course US lie more than anyone. Nevertheless, the US losses are far higher than the 50 aircrafts claimed by DOD. What were the effectiveness of SAM ? If there were low, why ? Did US coaltion had all secrets of radars frequencies of SAM before the war ? If yes by what ? Who ? How ? Where ? It is usefull to mention that SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 were all compromises, as the Migs, and Sukhoi radars, as Iraqi Air Defense radars. In these conditions, it is easy to jam them, or to disable them. Regarding Serbia's war, it is more harder to understand what's happenned exactly. In 90's Russia was in complete collapse, US accessed to all Russia's secrets weapons, meanwhile, noone had access to US, UK secrets. In that dark decade, most of serbian's secrets were in US hands. I mean that the studies, and analysis of SAM effectiveness is more harder than taking pieces of lies provided by Department of Propaganda as DOD. Assessing that SAM were ineffectives is an incorrect conclusion. I did not mean that SAM might be effective too.

Will the S-400, or S-300 be more effective nowadays against western fighters ? Maybe yes, or not ? The arrivals of new technologies available for SAM as furtive drone, microprocessors, servers, computer sciences, importants and powerfull C4I components, and new radars, RWR, new more modern more powerfull chineses, and russian satelits -glonass network-, IRST, laser, could significantly improve SAM tactical limitations, and their evident effectiveness. With the drones beside Air defense, the anti aircraft artillerie will become more more effectives, if not completly more lethal. Maybe are we going to assist at a new revolution of air defense ?

_________________“The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

The material reality is that newer generation SAM systems such as the S-300PMU1, S-300PMU2 Favorit (SA-20), HQ-9/FD-2000/FT-2000 and S-400 Triumf (SA-21) are in terms of basic technology and performance very close to, if not better than the US MIM-104 Patriot series, and importantly, have never been challenged in combat by Western air forces, these including the formidable Israeli Air Force.

This website I spent hours, and hours to read nearly all its articles. This website is well done.Ausairpower.net made a very serious work, nevertheless, the problem with Karlo Koop's website is its approach. I mean, he has an accademic attitude, because its conclusions are from US DOD, and Israeli defense minister informations. In other words, Karlo Koop's conclusions are from the center of propaganda, or, from the center lies. Hence, many times, he has complete wrong conclusions.Here is an excerpt what he wrote about Desert Storm

...The notion that the cumbersome SA-4 and SA-5 systems, and new mobile SA-10, SA-11 and SA-12 would have made up for the additional numbers and capability of Allied electronic combat assets in that theatre is hard to supportWhat this suggests is that the NATO-Warpac central European air battle would have probably followed a similar course, leading to the defeat of the Communists' IADS within a week or so, in turn leading to air superiority in the following week, as the Communist air forces would have withered under the fire of the Allied counter-air campaign.

Iam sorry but these conclusions are merely stupids, if not idiots. It is hard to know why Iraq did not fight as they might be. Nevertheless, a conflict is never an easy to study, even less to conclued quickly.

Here is a quote, that was in fact completly forgotten, and it reveal how hard was the US coalition engagement in Iraq war.

What does this "innoncent sentence" -British high command, alarmed at aircraft losses, abandons low-altitude attacks- suggest ? 5 days after the begining Desert Storm war, it suggests at least that the aircraft losses are higher than we were told. Told by US-British propaganda there is far to be a simple detail, but another thing that suggest that Iraqi air defense behaved better than we thougt. And the bombing campaign changed its tactics. The best way to bomb is at low altittude, and middle, or high altitude, you bomb nothing, other than useless targets.Do not forget things.- The syrian Mig-23 ML -was too, one of the best iraqi fighters- in 1983 downed several israelis' F-15, and F-16. In 1986 a syrian Mig-23 ML defected to Israel, and western specialists rushed to Israel in order to study the Mig-23 ML, they found that its avionics was far better than they believed. - 1986, the Tolkachev scandall, he betrayed his country, and sold the avionics of the Mig-29, Mig-31, Su-27 and their missiles.Immediatly, US modified their air fleet avionics.- 1990, France, member of Nato decided to join US coalition, and revealed all weak points of Kari -the strategical pilar that Iraqi air defense was relied-.

Then, before the war started most of the Iraqis best fighters, and radars were compromised, the secret frequencies were between US hands. Of course, there was easy for US to jam, with their elint, jammers, etc...but, it did not deter heavy losses for US coalition, and they decided to bomb at high altitude, and launch their fire and forget cruise missiles against static infrastructes, with limited impacts -as in Vietnam-. However, it did not deter Iraqis to manage to evade several dozens of Iraqis fighters, and tankers, including 16 Il-76, and Iraqis to launch ground offensive to Khafji. If indeed, AH-64 Apache, and A-10 took a toll of iraqi armors vehicles, yes, but....because iraqi divisions had been withdrawing from Kuwait, and without defense.

ConclusionIt suggest to me that US coalition had indeed, superiority, but not suprematy against iraqi air defense, but not enough impact to influe about the war. And US coaltion had many difficulties to keep its superiority. With that, how could Karlo Koop assert that in just one week, US coaltion could obliterate Warsaw pacts. It is simply ridiculous. I started to beware about many nato compliant websites.

wait, so in this alternate universe Pantsir or any other form of point defence does not exist?!? great joke whatever they are going on with here.not to mention medium SAMs like S-350 could be lying in wait with its radar off anywhere they might approach and they wont even notice- fly above one and get serbed.